|
|
|
|
Amusing political nonsense of the week.
|
|
so it seems many of the National Health Service Trusts in the country are pretty shabby at managing their finances. Specifically they are all heavily in the red. This in itself is not a funny thing, however a statement from a Health minister was (can't remember his name but it wasn't the Secretary of State it was one of his minions). When questioned about the fact that a multitude of hospitals across London (including Great Ormond Street) were in the red by so many millions that they have had to close wards in the past year because they do not have the necessary funds his reply was, and I freely admit I paraphrase, "it's perfectly normal for hospitals to be in the red by this much at the beginning of the year, we've put more money than anyone else ever into the NHS". First up, normal to be in the red at the beginning of the year? Has no one told this guy that in accounting the year is not based around the calender but is based around the tax cycle (April to April), which makes March the end of the year. Thus a hospital being in serious debt in March is not an acceptable thing at all. It's a very bad thing. Second, no one questioned whether Labour had put more money into the NHS, what they're questioning is where the hell has it gone if hospitals are millions in debt and cannot keep wards open? Classic Labour dodge and spin.
The second most funny thing I read yesterday was Gordon Brown's (Chancellor of the Exchequer) speech from Sunday. In that speech he said that we "have the lowest mortgage rates for 30 years". Errrr... mortgage rates have gone up four times in the last two years. We do not have the lowest mortgage rates for 30 years. We had the lowest mortgage rates for 30 years but that has now changed, rates are rising and have been for a while now. Another example of Labour disingenuity and misrepresentation of the facts for political purposes.
Finally are Labour's attack on the Tory Party. They've had to do this because they gave been caught totally on the back foot in campaign terms and the Tories have set the agenda. So what we had was the rolling out of the big Labour guns to scream about how the Tories would "cut billions from the budget". However, the use of the word "cut" is nothing more than disingenuous semantic bullshit. What is actually meant when Labour says "cut" is a reduction in the rate of a budget's increase. In other words the budget for say health this year will not be less next year if the Tories were to win the election. What would be different is the amount by which it would increase. Thus a "cut" in Labour terms is a reduction in money that is neither received or allocated yet.
Spin.. don't you just love it?
|
|
|
|
|
